Development of Three-Stage Methodology for a Strategy-Based Integrated Dynamics Model from a Value Chain Reconfiguring Perspective

  • Chung-Chou Tsai
  • Sununta Siengthai
  • Vilas Wuwongse
  • Donyaprueth Krairit
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 141)


The dynamics modeling system has forced the value chain reconfiguration to have fast-paced adaptability of clustered module structure associated with BSC-KIT (Balanced Scorecard, Knowledge-Integrated Traceability). It acts as a major driving support in developing the efficient appraisal and distinction of generic hierarchy of distribution decision factors. This paper proposes a Strategy-based Integrated Dynamics Model (SIDM) for process-driven capability of value chain reconfiguration using three-stage methodology. Its backbone is formed by the BSC-KIT of AHP-BSC structure (Analytic Hierarchy Process), ARIS-BSC platform (Architecture of Integrated Information System), hybrid ST-ARIS architecture (Systems Thinking) and a set of ARIS-EPCs architecture (Event-driven Process Chains) of decision-making strategy. SIDM development aims to supply findings of the events-and-patterns behavior of the aggregated comparison matrix, and to derive a precisely strategic mapping of causality for the industrial value chain. All these elements are taken to build cognition of a management-driven platform of the computer-aided process simulation model (CPSM).


Balanced Scorecard (BSC) Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Architecture of Integrated Information System (ARIS) Systems Thinking (ST) Value Chain Event-driven Process Chains (EPC) Decision-Making Modeling Clustered Module Structure 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Su, P.Z.: What’s wrong of Taiwan’s Publishing Industry Structure-Part I III. As-If Publishing House (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang, D.H., Kim, S.C., Nam, C.G., Min, J.W.: Developing a Decision Model for Business Process Outsourcing. Computers & Operations Research 34, 3769–3778 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adamides, E.D., Karacapilidis, N.: A Knowledge Centered Framework for Collaborative Business Process Modeling. J. Business Process Management 12(5), 557–575 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coviello, N.E.: Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Techniques in Network Analysis. J. Qualitative Market Research 8(1), 39–60 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salmeron, J.L., Herrero, I.: An AHP-Based Methodology to Rank Critical Success Factors of Executive Information Systems. Computer Standards & Interfaces 28, 1–12 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    IDS SCHEER: ARIS Design, ARIS Simulation. White Paper (2007),
  7. 7.
    Yurdakul, M.: AHP as a Strategic Decision-making Tool to Justify Machine Tool Selection. J. Materials Processing Technology 146, 365–376 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wong, K.W., Li, H.: Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in Multi-criteria Analysis of the Selection of Intelligent Building Systems. Building and Environment 43, 108–125 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rabelo, L., Eskandari, H., Shaalan, T., Helal, M.: Value Chain Analysis Using Hybrid Simulation and AHP. International J. Production Economics 105, 536–547 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    IDS SCHEER: Strategic Corporate Planning using Key Performance Indicators, ARIS BSC, IDS SCHEER Platform (2006),
  11. 11.
    Ugwu, O.O., Haupt, T.C.: Key Performance Indicators and Assessment Methods for Infrastructure Sustainability: A South African Construction Industry Perspective. Building and Environment 42, 665–680 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Papazoglou, M.P., Ribbers, P., Tsalgatidou, A.: Integrated Value Chains and Their Implications from a Business and Technology Standpoint. Decision Support System 29, 323–342 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gilmour, P.: Benchmarking Supply Chain Operations. International J. Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 29(4), 259–266 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huang, H.C.: Designing a Knowledge-based System for Strategic Planning: A Balanced Scorecard Perspective. Expert Systems with Applications (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Scheer, A.W., Nüttgens, M.: ARIS Architecture and Reference Models for Business Process Management. J. Computer Science, White Paper (2008),
  16. 16.
    Hsi, C.H.: Constructing a Process Reference Model of Electronic Procurement: Using a Medical Center as an Example. Master Research, Non-Publish, Chang Gung University, Taipei (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    O’Donnell, E.: Enterprise Risk Management: A Systems-thinking Framework for the Event Identification Phase. International J. Accounting Information Systems 6, 177–195 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu, S., Lee, A., Tah, J.H.M., Aouad, G.: The Use of a Multi-Attribute Tool for Evaluating Accessibility in Buildings: the AHP Approach - Facilities, vol. 25(9/10), pp. 375–389 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Loebbecke, C., Huyskens, C.: Development of a Model-based Netsourcing Design Support System Using a Five-stage Methodology. Europ. J. Oper. Res. 195, 653–661 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Han, K.H., Kang, J.G., Song, M.: Two-stage Process Analysis Using the Process-based Performance Measurement Framework and Business Process Simulation. Expert Systems with Applications 36, 7080–7086 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jawahar, N., Balaji, A.N.: A Genetic Algorithm for the Two-stage Supply Chain Distribution Problem Associated with a Fixed Charge. European J. Operational Research 194, 496–537 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Senge, P., Ross, R., Smith, B., Roberts, C., Kleiner, A.: The Fifth Discipline: Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization. Doubleday, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fisher, D.M., Potash, P.J.: The Promise of System Dynamics Modeling in K-12 Education (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    STELLA–Systems Thinking in an Experiential Learning Lab with Animation (2008),
  25. 25.
    Bertrand, J., Will, M., Fransoo, J.C.: Modeling and Simulation: Operations Management Research Methodologies using Quantitative Modeling. International J. Operation & Production Management 22(2), 241–264 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mansar, S.L., Reijers, H.A., Ounnar, F.: Development of a Decision-making Strategy to Improve the Efficiency of BPR. Expert Systems with Applications 36, 3248–3262 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chung-Chou Tsai
    • 1
  • Sununta Siengthai
    • 1
  • Vilas Wuwongse
    • 2
  • Donyaprueth Krairit
    • 1
  1. 1.School of ManagementAsian Institute of TechnologyKlong LuangThailand
  2. 2.School of Engineering and TechnologyAsian Institute of TechnologyKlong LuangThailand

Personalised recommendations